Nursing Daddyhttps://www.nursingdaddy.com
Tips & advice on modern day parenting from the experiences of a hands-on Dad.Mon, 28 Jan 2019 13:05:33 +0000en-GBhourly1Child and Teen Obesity: Ten Active Activities Every Child Should Be Able to Dohttps://www.nursingdaddy.com/child-and-teen-obesity-ten-active-activities-every-child-should-be-able-to-do/
https://www.nursingdaddy.com/child-and-teen-obesity-ten-active-activities-every-child-should-be-able-to-do/#respondFri, 18 Jan 2019 10:28:56 +0000https://www.nursingdaddy.com/?p=1109..Read More]]>

You do not have to look far to find a catalogue of publications and articles about child, teen and adult obesity levels being on the increase. It is not surprising that child and teenage obesity levels have risen ten-fold in the last four decades across the world. It is not surprising that child and teenage obesity levels have risen ten-fold in the last four decades across the world, because of a less active lifestyle, 24-hour fast food outlets and supermarkets, the additives in our food and a lack of daily physical exercise. This means that around 124 million girls and boys around the globe are too fat, according to a study conducted by The Lancet.

This study by The Lancet was the biggest of its kind, looking at obesity trends in over 200 countries. In the UK, one in every ten young people aged five to 19 were found to be obese. Though this is shocking, it appears to be becoming the norm and obese children are likely to become obese adults, putting them at risk of serious health problems, including type 2 diabetes, heart disease, stroke and certain types of cancer, such as breast and colon. This in turn increases the budget required to deal with such issues, which the World Obesity Federation has predicted will exceed £920bn every year from 2025.

Last week, I did a blog post on The Impact of TVs, Smartphones and Tablets on Children where I spoke about the vast amount of time children wasted on these devices or playing on game consoles. Whilst I tried to offer a balanced view, one thing that kept resonating with me was their lack of exercise or activity, compared to how much screen time they have.

Physical fitness is the primary idea in exercise physiology and can be considered as an integrated measure of most, if not all, body functions involved in carrying out daily physical activity (movement) and physical exercise. These body functions can be broken down into what is considered the Components of Fitness:

Aerobic Fitness

Body Composition

Muscular Strength

Power

Speed

Core

Balance

Flexibility

Co-Ordination

A high level of physical fitness in childhood has been linked to reduced risk of obesity and cardiovascular diseases (mainly narrowing or blocked blood vessels that can lead to a heart attack, chest pain – angina – or stroke), and improved musculoskeletal (the muscles and the bones) health and mental health.

Alarming for us all as parents is the need to do something about this. A survey conducted by Public Health England and Disney looked at the effects of physical activity on children’s emotional wellbeing.

What they found was that the number of children doing an hour of exercise a day falls by nearly 40% between the ages of five and 12. This indicates that by the final year of primary school, just 17% of pupils are doing the recommended 60 minutes of physical activity every day. By the time children leave primary school, more than a third are overweight. When asked for their views on this finding, a spokesman for Public Health England described the drop in activity levels as “concerning”.

What was interesting is that more than 1,000 children aged five to 11 were questioned, with their parents acknowledging that being active made their children feel happier (79%), more confident (72%), and more sociable (74%).

But a worrying fact the survey uncovered was that children’s overall happiness declined with age, with 64% of five- and six-year-olds saying they always felt happy, compared with just 48% of 11-year-olds.

A child’s self-consciousness, current lifestyles, a parent’s unwillingness to engage their kids, and technology all play a part in the current and continuing child and teen obesity issues. Conducting dynamic activity with kids does present its own challenges, due to their size, short attention span and interest; however, this is no excuse to not be active.

I have decided that I need to use my vast experience as an athlete and coach to help. Using the Components of Fitness list identified above, I have come up with ten Fitness Activities that I believe all children should be doing. My kids have agreed to be my guinea pigs, so over the coming months I will produce written material and videos explaining each element in the list below. Here is my list of ten active activities every child should do:

Flexibility: Improve

Balance: Improve

Muscle Strength: Use Body Weight

Core: Improve

Co-Ordination: Improve

SAQ: Speed-Agility-Quickness

Jump and Land: Correct Technique

Run and Jog: Correct Technique

Ball Skills: Correct Technique

Cartwheel: Learn

As and when they go live the titles will be active with all links inserted!

Sources

American College of Sports Medicine (2000) “ACSM’s Resource Manual for Guidelines for Exercise Testing and Prescription”, American College of Sports Medicine, 6th ed, Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Walking out of your house, at the school gates, at the shops and – even more surprising – at the playground are just a few of the places you will notice toddlers, kids and teens gazing down at the screens of tablets and smartphones.

Even worse is what happens indoors in front of the TV screens, and the enormous amount of time wasted watching TV or playing on game consoles. I must admit that, when it comes to our third child, I have found technology a great mini-babysitter, for those occasions when I need just that little bit of time to sort out lunch/dinner or when I need time to teach or do reading with the other two kids.

I am fully guilty, and I know it is wrong, especially when our little two-year-old cries to get hold of the tablet. Already we can see a mini addiction taking place, to the extent that when we hide it, he is fine, but as soon as he sees the tablet, he wants it. It is these observations that make me question the impact of TVs, smartphones and tablets on children.

Little did we know the effect that an announcement by Apple CEO Steve Jobs on 27th January 2010 at the Yerba Buena Center in San Francisco would have on us and our kids. This announcement was about the first-generation iPad; whilst there were other versions of tablets before this date, the iPad was a real game changer, and I am very sure that even the great mind of Steve Jobs could not have foreseen its success and the potential harmful effects on our kids.

Most young children today know how to use a tablet or smartphone way before they even learn to ride a bike. It is then no surprise that you will see many kids, even those with their parents, staring down at screens with a zombie-like expression on their faces, rather than playing outdoors or chatting with their friends and family.

A report published in 2012 showed that 37% of kids aged between three and four went online to see a website, watch TV or play videogames on smartphones while 15.5% watched TV every week.

Research by the Kaiser Foundation revealed that children as well as teens use up to five times more technology than is recommended – in a related incident, a teen was involved in a fatal car crash while texting.

Another team of researchers discovered that seven out of ten parents let their kids use tablets; in fact, 90% of today’s children, even as young as two years of age, have access to a tablet..

Yet the impact of smartphones and tablets on a child’s wellbeing is not known or it cannot me measured, as the data required for a concrete judgement cannot be trusted This is because data collection is in its early infancy.

An experiment conducted by the Centre for Toddler Development at Barnard College revealed that children between 18 and 36 months old did not respond when their names were called out, as a result of being absorbed in an iPad. I have observed this in my kids and I consider myself to be very strict when it comes to time on technology screens. It was found that when the devices were taken away, the children showed signs of creative behaviour while exhibiting more common, sociable actions.

However, all of this must be kept in perspective, since this is the first generation of kids born with smartphones and tablets, and scientists do not have a lot to go on as far as long-term impact is concerned. That being said, there has been evidence of kids suffering from anxiety and other social disorders as a result of spending too much time in front of screens.

Let’s be clear here: TVs, smartphones and tablets are not all bad, since they help children access information quickly (for school and general knowhow) and may improve their hand-to-eye coordination to a certain extent. However, unmonitored use may very well lead to adverse long-term effects that can have a negative impact on a child’s development.

One such negative effect is the “blue light” coming from a TV, smartphone or tablet screen that disrupts the normal sleep/wake cycle and suppresses melatonin levels, the hormone responsible for regulating sleep. It is not a particularly encouraging sign that 75% of children are allowed to take “technology” to their rooms, which has the resulting effect of sleep deprivation.

As parents, it is our duty to protect our kids, who can be easily detached emotionally when online, where cyber-bullying is very common and the internet is rife with material that make our kids feel uneasy about their image – which in turn can raise their depression and anxiety levels.

Having the ability to develop a good set of mental, physical, emotional and social skills means our children need to spend enough time outdoors, be physically active, but at the same time get closely monitored “screen time”. In the current world we live in, we just have to find a way to make it work.

As parents, we are sometimes lost when it comes to knowing what is right; there are consistently conflicting views about smartphone and tablet usage effects, and also non-effects, on our kids. Two studies conducted by Oxford University suggested that there are no effects.

The first study revealed a number of interesting findings that suggested that limiting a child’s digital device usage may not necessarily be beneficial for wellbeing. The second study stated that the amount of time children spend on devices has little effect on how long they sleep.

And just last week The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, the body that oversees the training of specialists in child medicine, said that parents should worry less about their children’s screen use, as there was no good evidence that time in front of a screen is “toxic” to health, as is sometimes claimed.

Taking into account all of these conflicting views, I will conduct a review post about the impact of screen time, smartphones and tablets on a child’s wellbeing.

What you are not told before you have children is the level of patience that is required. But, having had two kids prior to my third in January 2017, you might ask if I should have had a better idea of the type of patience that was required. The answer to this is no, no, and an even bigger NO!

My last blog post dates back to March 2017, about a certain man called Donald Trump. So much has passed in the world since then, and certainly Donald Trump has made his mark on the world.

In this time, it feels that my life has stood still, whilst at the same time I have been on a journey of parenting discovery, unearthing my own parenting patience. It is often said that patience is a virtue; it is what gives us peace. But reaching this peaceful moment each day is something of a challenge when kids are involved.

I’m talking about from the moment they wake up, their inability to sleep past 6am – when you are in desperate need of sleep – and their activity throughout the day, to the point when you have to initiate the bedtime routine. This peaceful moment becomes difficult to achieve. It is this non-stop relentlessness of their energy that wears you down as a parent, from the moment they wake up till they enter their rooms again to sleep. Michael McIntyre illustrates this bedtime routine very well with his comedy routine below:

Being patient is difficult in normal day-to-day life, but in the case of your kids it becomes even more of a challenge, as their rational thought is based on a level of selfishness and annoyance, which can sometimes be taken as a deliberate attack on a parent, as no logic explains the act. Worst of all, as parents we are also selfish and think about ourselves and what makes our life easier, even when, unlike our children, we are meant to be rational, which is not easy!

I came across the following quote during a church sermon, which has allowed me to reflect more and try to reach this peaceful state:

A moment of patience in a moment of anger, saves you a hundred moments of regret [Unknown]

While striving to maintain this new-found level of peace, I will be active and blogging on a weekly basis, to help me reflect on both the challenging and peaceful moments of being a dad.

How does one explain Donald Trump to kids, particularly when we speak about his predecessor, Barack Hussein Obama? Whilst there are both positive and negative feelings and opinions at the forefront of most minds. Regarding what is happening in America, there is the risk that the very mention of Trump’s name leads people to think of Armageddon, the last and completely destructive battle.

So the question remains: how do you explain Donald Trump to kids? Do we really need to explain the person? Or can we use this momentous event and Donald Trump as a teaching aid? In today’s celebrity society a lot of people believe that those in the public eye set an example to be followed. But are we parents and caregivers scapegoating and shaming those in lights without taking into account our own responsibilities? Let’s consider the journey and how we may use it to educate our kids!

Donald Trump 45th President of the United States

2016 was the year of unpredictable shocks. First there was the 5,000 to 1 outsiders Leicester City FC winning football’s 2015/2016 Premier League in the UK. Then following the referendum held on 23 June 2016, the United Kingdom voted to withdraw from the European Union; with outside odds of 4 to 1 to “Leave” compared to the favourable odds of 1 to 7 to “Remain”. Then ending the year spectacularly was Donald Trump and his win over Hillary Clinton in what appeared the most unlikely of victories, with odds of 25 to 1 back in August 2015 when he first announced his campaign – and the world chuckled with such spontaneity and synchronicity causing a seismic earthquake of laughter.

Donald Trump believed: his dream – and many people’s nightmares – came true. With his victory, Donald Trump became the only president to never have served in elected public office, the military, or government before becoming president. However, is dreaming big the goal in life? Dreaming big and Trump-ling (sorry, trampling) on others along the way cannot make the majority of mankind happy. Can it?

In winning, Donald Trump became the fifth person in US history to become president despite losing the nationwide popular vote. Hillary Clinton received almost three million more votes in the general election than her opponent. In numbers that is 65,853,625 (48.0%) to 62,985,106 (45.9%), giving Clinton a popular vote lead of more than 2% over Trump. Surely any person with the ability to self-reflect cannot be happy with that? Somehow I do not believe The Donald cares much.

Principles concerning the distinction between right and wrong or good and bad behaviour.

It is almost a given that neither Hillary Clinton nor Donald Trump score highly when morality is measured, based on the range of issues that persisted throughout both their campaigns. However, voters were presented with one or the other so morality became the forgotten word. This was expressed by Yoni Appelbaum in his article published in The Atlantic in October last year, titled “Trump Is No Moral Exemplar – He’s a Champion”. Here, Appelbaum said:

The conservative, Christian voters backing the Republican nominee are looking for someone who can defend them, not someone who embodies their values.

The fascinating insight about the US Election 2016 was that both the candidates were from either the political or society’s upper class who have socialised with each other in the past – Donald Trump was in fact a past financial supporter of Bill Clinton. However, with the most important job in the world up for the taking they were willing to go at each other with hammer and tongs. So where did morality go?

If the two candidates can lose morality so easily, then the voting US public, who after all do not know these two personally, can lose theirs. Surely after stories of misogyny, racism, dishonesty, fraudulent behaviour and sexism, good old moral values could be unearthed once again, dusted off and sent back into the minds of those voting? No is the answer, as the following insights from the voting figures show;

For all votes, 53% of males, all associated with either mothers, sisters or daughters voted for Donald Trump. Worryingly, 42% of mothers, sisters and daughters in the female category voted for Trump.

58% of White voters, who I am sure have neighbours, work colleagues, classmates who are Mexican’s (sorry could not leave out those from the country that will be cattle-penned by 'The Wall', or those from different ethnic backgrounds voted for Trump.

What about the older generation who are meant to empower the younger generation with wisdom and a set of morals? 53% on average of the older generation (age groups 45-64 and 65 and over) voted for Donald Trump; the very same people responsible for teaching their children or grandchildren values.

On the question of a better education for children, those with a higher education were more likely not to vote for Donald Trump (41% did), compared to those of a lower education (51.5% voted for Trump).

Society often looks down on those from the so-called “broken homes”, upholding the belief that marriage is the unity of a family. If this is the case then what happened to the unity of knowing right from wrong? 53% of those married voted for Donald Trump compared to 38% of those not married.

Regardless of religious affiliation, we all believe that right is right and wrong is wrong within any religion, right? 55% of those with either Protestant, Christian or Catholic affiliation voted for Donald Trump, compared to only 26.3% from either Jewish or other religions. Morality does not exist!

The most telling insight from the voting figures is the 63% of voters that would have voted for a third person had that person existed, indicating that morality comes with conditions attached. Trump won because it came down to the situation and Hillary Clinton was the wrong opponent at the wrong time. Surely we should be teaching our kids that morality does not come with a set of conditions that fit our current train of thought: this can be the only way!

Love Donald Trump or not, he does show us all the true value of how to be a family man (yes he has been married three times, but that can happen to any of us). Trump is the fourth child to Fred Trump, who was a New York real estate tycoon.

Trump senior demonstrated the value of family by giving Donald Trump a "small" $1m loan to start his real estate empire. Not long after which he took over his dad’s business.

Donald Trump kept true to this family values as his children worked for the Trump Organization and were advisers on the US Apprentice TV Show. The next generation of Trumps played a key role in their father’s US election campaign, and in announcing his team for the White House, Donald Trump has named son-in-law Jared Kushner as a senior advisor to the president, a position he has specially created to get a family member into the White House.

My question to both of you is, regardless of the current rhetoric, would either of you name one positive thing that you respect in one another?

Hillary Clinton’s response was:

Well, I certainly will, because I think that's a very fair and important question. Well, I respect his children. His children are incredibly able and devoted and I think that says a lot about Donald.

To which Trump responded:

Well, I consider her statement about my children to be a very nice compliment. I don’t know if it was meant to be a compliment, but I am proud of my children. They have done a wonderful job and they have been wonderful kids.

Donald Trump and Other Men in Power

Donald Trump was dogged by allegations from the moment he announced that he would be running for office. These have been based on his misogynistic and racist views and his p***y grabbing, not to mention his boasting arrogance. In his own words:

You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful. I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. I just kiss. I don’t wait. And then you’re a star they let you do it. You can do anything.

Which he followed up with a statement to justify his comments:

This was locker-room banter, a private conversation that took place many years ago. Bill Clinton has said far worse to me on the golf course – not even close. I apologize if anyone was offended.

Sadly this type of view or behaviour is commonplace amongst males in power who feel that they can do whatever they want, and I am not singling men out, but you never hear of women in power behaving in such a manner.

The examples given here reflect the double standard and treatment of women, but these same guys in power have massive issues in protecting the closed network of equal-minded people, and not only have a total disregard for women, but also race, religion and sexual orientation. Hence the need to instil in our kids the right moral values and duty of care for each other.

Lessons from Donald Trump

Whilst we are in a difficult position to pass judgement on another person, Donald Trump as a man offers us many opportunities, be it positive or negative, to learn and educate ourselves to help our families. Some of the key points that can be taken out of the Donald Trump the case study are:

Dream big and you may just make your dreams come true.

Winning at anything at all costs is not the aim in life, winning whilst everybody wins must be more fulfilling.

Having a solid moral grounding is the key to resisting the urge of going along with what you know to be wrong rather than doing what you know is right, simply because what is right does not fit with your current beliefs or thinking.

Love for the family should be a strong bond; families that stay together can overcome most things in life.

Pay special attention to your boys; teach them the true value of life and the need to respect power, position and women. After all, history shows that our girls are getting this message loud and clear, but boys grow into men without fully understanding this, thus believing they can do as they want!

Long before I became a parent, I said to myself that I will always hold myself responsible for how my kids turn out. We do not have to look far to see parents of celebrities or sports stars enjoying the fame game, whilst their kids are misbehaving or doing things that do not have a high moral value.

So in trying to explain Donald Trump to my kids, I will stay away from the person and look to try to use the good and the bad in the topics surrounding Donald Trump to help explain morality and the duty of care.

We have become a world of consumption and are greatly concerned with what we can get for ourselves and our family; therefore perhaps it is more important now than ever that people care more about each other and the world they live in. People think about winning big at the cost of others; those in power or position care a lot about legacy rather than what is best for all.

Do not get me wrong, I am most certainly not perfect, but one thing I strive for is teaching my kids the importance of doing to others as they want others to do to them, that it should be difficult for anyone to believe that they are more important than another person. In the case of President Trump, we can use him as an example of what morality is, or isn’t, by looking at both sides of the coin. In the end, I want to give my kids the opportunity to learn from myself as well as those who are in a spotlight, however they are perceived.

Children have a distinct personality, which falls broadly either into a Compliant or Defiant Child category. My wife and I have been blessed with one compliant and one defiant child. The difference or behaviour between a compliant or defiant child can be startling, and presents all parents with lots of sleepless nights.

All kids are unique and, as such, how they perceive and interact with others can be significantly different. What we try to remember always is that all kids have different talents that develop as they grow. We try our best never to parent by treating both kids in obviously distinct ways, as we worry that labelling them as either compliant or defiant in our minds will only affect how we interact with them; however, this is not an easy task.

Any bias towards labelling a child as either compliant or defiant can have a profound effect on that child. The compliant child will grow up never experiencing the harsh realities of life, and the defiant child grows up with dented self-confidence. A good definition of these personality types was given by The UCB Word For Today:

The Compliant Child: those who sleep through the night from the second week of life. They coo at their grandparents, and smile while their nappies are being changed. They are never sick on the way to the grocery store or the doctor’s surgery. During later childhood they love to keep their rooms clean, and they do their homework brilliantly without being asked.

The Defiant Child: ”strong-willed kids”. They get their mother’s attention long before birth because they scratch their initials on the walls (of the womb) and kick like crazy. They enter the world yelling about the temperature in the delivery room, and complaining about the incompetence of the nursing staff. From about eighteen months forward, they want to run things and tell everybody what to do. Their favourite word is no!

It is interesting that the descriptions above paint a gloom image of a defiant child, however, this is not the case. We simply see it as a means of figuring out how we can bring out the best qualities in our defiant child, no matter how much of a hard task it is. And on the opposite end, to ensure that our compliant child does not float (accompanied with a circling halo) into the clouds believing butter cannot melt in their mouth.

Whilst it may be easy for many parents to run away from their very own contribution towards their child’s behaviour, preliminary investigations have revealed some evidence suggesting that genetic influences may be at work in our kids. Behavioural genetics research indicates that genetic factors play a role in individual differences in children’s temperaments.

The word “temperament” is brandished around in everyday speech, however, this is a complex word that has taken the greatest minds years to define and it’s continually being redefined. To date, most attempts to define temperament draws parallels to the definition given in 1987 by a prominent cognitive psychologist, Robert McCall. McCall created a definition of temperament that included elements common to the four main theories of temperament at the time. According to McCall

Temperament consists of relatively consistent, basic dispositions inherent in the person that underlie and modulate the expression of activity, reactivity, emotionality, and sociability. Major elements of temperament are present early in life, and those elements are likely to be strongly influenced by biological factors. As development proceeds, the expression of temperament increasingly becomes more influenced by experience and context.

Considering the complexity of McCall’s definition, it may be easier to view the definition as three elements common to all temperament characteristics:

The individual differences are present at birth

The differences are inherent in the person

The differences are stable across development

For all parents or guardians, understanding or being aware of a child’s temperament can only serve to improve relationships that exist reciprocally – we all have innate styles that can be complex. Researchers have taken the blog topic further and divided children’s temperament generally into three temperament types:

Easy or flexible children tend to be happy, regular in sleeping and eating habits, adaptable, calm, and not easily upset.

Active or feisty children may be fussy, irregular in feeding and sleeping habits, fearful of new people and situations, easily upset by noise and stimulation, and intense in their reactions.

Slow to warm or cautious children may be less active or tend to be fussy, and may withdraw or react negatively to new situations; but over time they may become more positive with repeated exposure to a new person, object, or situation.

Whilst not all children’s temperaments fall effortlessly into one of the three types outlined above, parents or guardians can somehow manipulate the circumstances to nurture a child to showcase the development of their natural strengths and weaknesses. And for a reflective parent or guardian this may help one to understand their own strengths and limitations through the temperament types identified.

No two kids are the same; even if they find themselves in either the compliant or defiant child category, a great deal of adaptation is required. Whilst my wife and I do not have all the answers, we have established clear boundaries for both our kids and try in a loving nature to be understanding within them. We often do not live up to the level of fairness we wish to apply for both kids and find ourselves being short with our so-called defiant child. Raising kids is not an easy task, which is made worse by our own chest of complex junk built up over our lifetime!

With Pope Francis declaring Mother Teresa a saint in September 2016, I have been looking for ways to pay tribute to her, to someone who believed that every life matters and every life is valuable.

We often look for ways to become a better person and instil our children with the right qualities. We do not have to look far for inspiration, as Mother Teresa was a true advocate of love, peace and human dignity. Her wisdom and her deep-seated love for every human being, including the poor, the sick, the unborn, and the dying, qualifies her as someone we should use as an example to teach our kids.

Mother Teresa, in her quiet and humble-natured manner. addressed world leaders at the United Nations General Assembly on their 40th Anniversary. She had one thing on her mind: Love. In a speech titled ‘One Strong Resolution: I Will Love’, Mother Teresa provided an insight on how we can have world peace; she simply said 'Go home and love your family’.

Love is the only thing that never fails, if we all do this, teach our children this, then we may just be able to make a difference in this world, making it a kinder place for them, and our grandchildren to live. Extracts from Mother Teresa’s speech to the United Nations General Assembly relates to our own households:

How does peace come? Through works of love. Where does it begin? At home. How does it begin? By praying together. For family that prays together stays together. And if you stay together, you will love one another as God loves each one of you. For Prayer gives a clean heart and a clean heart can see God. And if you see God in each other, if we have the joy of seeing God in each other, we will love one another. That’s why no colour, no religion, no nationality should come between us. For we are all the same children of the same loving hand of God, created for greater things: to love and to be loved. Only we must experience that joy of loving.

Yes, this is what you and I, today, if we really stand for why we have come here today, to begin that year of peace, we must begin at home, we must begin in our own family. Works of love begin at home and works of love are works of peace.

Without learning and understanding love, how can we teach our children to love and love others?

What do Victoria Beckham, The Game and Bill Belichick have in common? In the most unlikeliest of links, they have all found themselves being subjected to public debate on the rights and wrongs of the Parent-Child Kiss.

In their quest to show the world just how much they love their daughter, David and Victoria Beckham shared on their individual Instagram accounts two adorable pictures to celebrate Harper’s fifth birthday.

A photo posted by David Beckham (@davidbeckham) on Jul 10, 2016 at 1:10am PDT

David kicked it off (no punt intended) with Harper giving him a peck on his cheek. This parent-child kiss was greeted with the usual heart-melting messages. However, when wife Victoria shared her sweet snap, the internet woke up.

What was meant to be the sweetest of birthday snaps by two proud parents, this photograph of Victoria and Harper kindled a debate about whether parents should kiss their children on the lips.

Many of Victoria’s so-called followers did not hold back and a glance at their comments could so easily put them in the parenting shamers category. Those objecting used words such as ”inappropriate”, ”disgusting” and ”horrible”, but thankfully there were an army of responders that believed in the statement ”each to their own” who leapt to Victoria’s defence.

Using Victoria’s images as an example BBC Trending tried to shed some light on the topic of the parent-child kiss by consulting the social etiquette expert, Liz Brewer, and this is what she had to say:

Normally with a member of your family you don't kiss on the lips unless it's your husband … With children, I wouldn't have thought it's a particularly good habit to get into but it's her child and she's at liberty to do what she thinks is best.

I would be uncomfortable doing that and I think most people would be. If she feels it's appropriate, so be it. I wouldn't say it sets a particularly good example.

Whilst I am a great fan of etiquette, as the very premise of it is putting other people first, I am somewhat alarmed to hear Liz Brewer say that she doesn’t think it sets a good example. Example for what? Does this action suggest that your child will start kissing everyone in sight? Become sexual? I am confused and lost at sea by this statement, which indeed is shared by those who believe there is an issue in parent-child kissing. And it appears that every time a celeb expresses their love for their kids in a parent-child kiss this topic rears its head.

A photo posted by The Game (@losangelesconfidential) on Jun 19, 2016 at 9:13pm PDT

Ever since LA rapper The Game rose to fame with his debut album in 2005, he has been something of a controversial figure. No stranger to social media backlash, The Game did not know what he was opening up by sharing a picture on his Instagram account that showed him kissing his five-year-old daughter on the lips, all in the name of celebrating father’s day.

This innocent snap stimulated a huge debate about whether a father should ever kiss his daughter on the lips, with some stepping up to defend The Game, and others taking the opposing stance.

What I found fascinating was the fact that the discussion should be about a father kissing his daughter on the lips – what about a father kissing his son on the lips? And more importantly, what about a mother who has spent the best part of a year carrying her child, along with dealing with sleepless nights for the first year of her child’s existence, is she allowed to kiss her daughter or son on the lips? Have we become a self-righteous society? The inconsistency of views shared by society is plain to be see, as a different question was asked when Bill Belichick kissed his daughter in 2015.

Not many of us normal folk will ever experience the euphoria of winning the Super Bowl once. So when New England Patriots Head Coach Bill Belichick in 2015 was pictured celebrating his fourth Super Bowl victory by kissing his adult daughter, Amanda Belichick, on the lips, the photo received worldwide coverage. Within moments of this personal encounter the image was doing the social media rounds like wildfire. Once again, as with The Game, there were those that leapt to Bill’s defence with words such as ”sweet” and ”intimate moment between a family”. But there were many that labelled it ”super weird”, ”aggressive” and ”making out”.

This time an alternative question was asked: if there is an age parents shouldn’t kiss their son or daughter on the lips?

Interestingly, it is very clear from a second image below, where Bill is embracing both son and daughter in a happily loving manner, that this dad was just happy with his achievements and wanted to share this with those that were close to him.

In an attempt to figure out this magical age we should all stop kissing our kids on the lips, New York Daily News spoke to a New York City etiquette expert, Elaine Swann. On the topic of the ideal age to stop kissing your kids Swann could not be specific, but she suggested that it's an age far younger than Belichick's 30-year-old daughter. She had this to say:

Adult parents should probably not be kissing their adult children on the lips, in public. We are judged by the way we behave so we have to be mindful of how we're perceived by others when we're in a public place, no matter what you're celebrating.

Swann told the Daily News that her own Panamanian descent makes her a bit hands-on with her family and she said of Bill Belichick that his ancestry links may have influenced his behaviour. Apparently, those from Croatia have a culture where they are hands-on with their family. Is this not what each of us should be doing with our family? Being hands–on?

Before my kids were born I had always had the view that I would kiss my children on the lips. I have not sat in the dark deliberating this, but past discussions with friends provoked me to give this parent-child kiss topic a thought. I am happy to say that, with the birth of my kids, I have not felt any different and freely in private as well as in public plant kisses on my kids’ lips, not to aggravate because I am simply following my natural feelings. Whilst I understand that good etiquette places others first, I try to keep all my kisses to a peak and quick, this way I express my heartfelt love to my kids whilst limiting the effect for those that may find it offensive.

Whilst I fully understand others’ feelings, I do not share that view that kissing a son or daughter on the lips is an unusual practice. Are we trying to pigeonhole a parent’s natural feeling and, at worse, are we sexualising it?

Is it this sexualisation by those seeing it that is causing unease about these innocent snaps? Which in turn is causing trepidation? I fully respect all those that say that parent-child kissing on the lips is not for them, but surely there is nothing in it and it should be a parent's choice as to whether they consider it appropriate or not?

Pushy Parent is a term that did not sit well with me long before I become a parent, and now that I am a father, my opinion has not altered. It has long been my view that parents on the whole know what is best for their kids, they are at the helm and best placed to understand the idiosyncrasies of their kids better than anyone.

Is it time for a rethink on how this term is bandied around without much thought, just because someone wants the best for their kid(s)? Are we just envious of another’s child excelling? Is this just a simple case of looking in the mirror and seeing the shortcomings of our own parenting abilities? Whilst there will always be anomalies, I am yet to meet parents who are not motivated by wanting the best for their kids!

What has motivated this blog post?

I read an article by the BBC about a father called Ray Wood, who believes that he can turn his seven-year-old daughter into a tennis champion. He has devised a carefully well-structured plan to achieve this. I happened to like this article and saved it for a later read, but when I returned to it I was drawn to the comments section. Reading through these responses it became apparent that almost everyone had become qualified, lifted themselves onto a pedal stool and expelled Ray Wood to the dungeon for pushy parents.

By pure coincidence a few weeks later, with this article fresh on my mind, I happened to take my son to the hairdressers for a haircut. As it is often the case with me, I embarked on small talk with this lovely lady, Jenna, who had just strapped my nervous son into a Porsche-like chair, and was primed with scissors in hand. The hairdresser had taken a keen interest in my family so it was not long before I asked about her kids, their ages and which school they go to

Jenna mentioned that one of her kids was at St Olave's Grammar School, which just happens to be an outstanding school that is really difficult to gain a place to. I was now totally impressed, so more questions followed, and she revealed that her kids have a natural talent for mathematics, gained from her husband’s side of the family – nice of her to credit an ND.

Jenna informed me that she and her husband had a duty to ensure that their kids’ natural abilities could flourish, however, they find they are often referred to as pushy parents. Once again, I was faced with this ugly phrase.

Have pushy parents touched a raw nerve with me?

As parents, my wife and I often encounter the pushy parent phrase; people often use it in a joking, light-hearted way in conversations with us.

Both of us have achieved high in the academic and sports worlds. My wife studied to become a doctor and was also a Swedish athlete. I obtained a PhD in the field of Engineering and also played football at academy level and conducted athletics to national level. As a result of these achievements, depending on the company we are in, people will often offer statements to the effect of

“I feel sorry for your kids as they have to achieve in the academic world”

“Your kids have a lot to live up to as you have done very well in sports”

Not far away from offering their carefully formulated and educated guesses on our kids’ future directions, we are often presented with a closing gambit of

“You will be one of those pushy parents”

So why am I in agreement with Ray Wood?

From the outset I believe the BBC reporter is painting Ray Wood to be a parent who is trying to force his kids into something he could never achieve, with lines like

Ray came across as a likeable and unassuming family man.

Yet, as he talks, you soon realise he is making some jaw-dropping claims.

In fact, the article leads me to question whether the BBC tennis correspondent, and the wider population, actually understand what it takes to create a top sportsman or sportswoman! Ray understands what it takes and states that

Talent is made, it's not born.

This assertion by Mr Wood is in-keeping with Malcolm Gladwell’s “10,000-hour rule”, which has gained traction. This rule implies that success depends on the time we spend in deliberate practice to master whatever we plan on becoming an expert in.

I feel that I qualify to pass judgement on Ray’s statement about talent. Aside from my own sporting achievements, I have coached and worked with international track athletes, above national level golf and tennis players, professional football clubs and players as well as working with the English under 20 female team (as a speed technique specialist), with the majority going on to gain senior caps for England women.

Through my involvement in elite sports, I have come to the conclusion that the majority of sports are based on skill and not on genetic make-up. Clearly there are a few exceptions where genetics come into play:

If you want to become the best sprinter in the world, you will need super-fast-twitch muscle, unfortunately this is limited to only a few on planet earth.

If you want to become the best distance runners, you will need to have heritage links to East Africa (Ethiopia and Kenya). For all those Europeans thinking that Mo Farah is English, sorry all, but he was born in Somalia.

If you want to be the best cyclist or swimmer you need to have a high VO2 uptake. Whilst you can train to improve this, those with the best are born with it. For example, I was a sprinter, and typically VO2 max is around 55 ml/kg/min for sprinters, but I had a VO2 max of 65 ml/kg/min, which is high. This was not gained as a result of heavy training on my behalf; it was largely because I was born with it.

Aside from these few exceptions above, top sports like basketball, football, golf, gymnastics, rowing and tennis are all skill-based sports where investment in practice can set you apart. In many of these sports, the athletes start young and develop an instinctive feel. Time invested allows them to cover most game play situations and scenarios. I mean

How does a Formula 1 driver control an out-of-control racing car at 200mph, whilst at the same time having a calm, concise conversation with his team over the radio? Answer: practice from an early age.

How do Messi and Ronaldo float on the pitch as if other players do not exist? Answer: practice from an early age. They have been through so many hours and hours on the training pitch alone going through plays, that when they find themselves in a game under the same condition their bodies take over – muscle memory. Without muscle memory they will not have sufficient time to react and carry out the skill.

Because tennis players start so young now, if Ray’s daughters are to have a chance of dominating female tennis then he does not have any choice but to start them playing at this age. So all those comments about Ray being a pushy parent is contrary to what is required to be the best or amongst the best. If that is what he has decided for his girls and they agree with it and enjoy it then this is the only way. If the kids decide at a later age that they no longer like the sport and are not willing to put in the practice, then no matter what Ray tries the girls will not reach the pinnacle of female tennis.

Tennis, along with other sports that require kids to start from an early age, has long been associated with parents being pushy. But Novak Djokovic’s father Srdjan Djokovic insisted in an interview that he wasn’t driving his toddler to be a great tennis player; he said that he felt an obligation to nurture his son’s very evident and abundant talent.

Parents are unrealistic with their careers and dreams. They decide that their child is great and put so much pressure on the child that it cannot handle it. When it grows up and learns how to live, chaos comes. The whole family is destroyed. I didn’t decide that Novak was a talent, because I am not a tennis player. I listened to the advice of others.

Now, that is the key. What Srdjan Djokovic, Ray Wood, and Jenna identified was or is a child’s gift and then their simply being duty bound to help nourish it. In previous blog posts I have written about A Child’s Calling: Signature Strengths and A Child’s Calling: Multiple Intelligences, not Intelligence Quotient. Both posts deal with identifying a child’s natural calling, and once this is identified I do believe that you’re duty bound to help your child grow and develop this gift. But should helping your child reach their full potential attract the pushy parent tag?

Is it time to rethink terming people pushy parents?

Whilst it may appear that I am narrow-minded in my opinions, I am only trying to provide an alternative against the one-sided view that the majority of parents wanting the best for their kids are pushy parents. For the few success stories in our top sports, musicians and academics stars are millions that did not make it. There are many dozens who fall far short of their potential, and there are the hundreds of stories outlining that children of pushy parents are more likely to reject them in later life. Does this mean that we stop trying for the best for our kids?

Whilst our children may have all the right genetic pulls to be successful in sports, my wife and I are not dreaming of raising sporting superstar kids, we are simply awakening their senses. We are introducing and exposing them to all aspects of life, not just sports. Through this, should they show talent or show interest and enthusiasm in a skill, we will be there to support them and make whatever they choose as enjoyable for them as possible.

Both my wife and I believe that what you put into life is what you get out, this means that you need to work hard in whatever you choose, we teach this to our kids and hope they will apply this thinking to their lives also. This approach, I do not think, makes us or many parents pushy. I believe this term needs to disappear, after all, if you aim for the sky and fall short you may just find some cloud.

Being married to anyone from a different cultural background presents many moments of laughter when you poke fun at each other’s distinctive behaviours. But when your wife says to you “darling, it’s time for the baby to sleep outside” when it just happens to be in the coldest time of year, do you question if she has finally lost it?

Probably best if I recreate the scene that made me wonder if I needed to call the police and medics to assist me in sectioning my wife. Our Dragon was born at the end of January 2012 and this month and February are often the coldest months in the UK.

Upon hearing her say it was time to take the baby outside, not only did I ask my wife to repeat what she had said, but all I could think about was the prospect of sleeping outdoors. Sleep in the cold? Had she not heard about foxes attacking babies in a room whilst they slept in their cots? I allowed her to carry out this apparently crazy idea (none the wiser), and luckily for us it went smoothly and Dragon appeared to be brighter when he woke up.

Our different approaches to childcare stem from our cultural backgrounds, however these differences can get you in trouble when you travel away from your country. Back in 1997, a Danish tourist called Anette Sorensen who was visiting New York City was arrested for leaving her 14-month-old child outside a restaurant in a pram to sleep. She was charged with endangerment of the child who subsequently was put into foster care for a few days. A year later, Anette sued the City, citing that this practise was a cultural norm in Denmark.

I questioned my wife as to the benefits of this Swedish custom and she informed me that it had been in existence for a long time in Scandinavia, and that kids slept better and longer in the cold. She informed me that parents would leave kids in gardens, on balconies, outside cafes and that all nurseries have special barns or rooms outside for nap times.

Since the initial shock of thinking my wife needed medical attention, we have engaged in this Swedish practice of Sova Ute with both our kids and I can honestly say that there are some truths that children do sleep better and for longer when they have their nap outside. Unlike in Sweden, we cover our prams with nets to prevent bees getting in and then use a pram curtain to ensure that they can have perfect conditions for sleep.

The practice of Sub Zero Baby Sleeping is limited by a lack of research, however, this is growing fast and so far supports the benefits of allowing your baby to sleep outside. ND has looked at the pros and cons on this topic and presented the findings in Baby Sleep: Sub-Zero Temperatures Sleep, well wealth a read.

Advice to all parents: if you're poor, become rich. If your child happens to be female then trade her in for a male. If you’re thinking of sending your child to a good university, forget this and only aim for a top university. If you happen to come from a poor social background then you really need to step up and get out of it. A study has found that potential graduate earnings can be impacted by these factors.

The last two blog posts by ND presented two ways in which parents can help their kids identify their creative calling, by understanding Multiple Intelligences and Signature Strengths. Now, a creditable report has found graduate earnings to be linked to gender, wealth, institution, course and socio-economics, which would suggest that efforts should be spent instead on ensuring your child goes to a top university and that they select medicine or economics as a degree subject. Though a parent cannot change their level of wealth or social background overnight, or the gender of their children, they can help them to pick the right university and subject.

Report highlights

Graduates from affluent families earn considerably more after leaving university than students from poorer backgrounds.

In almost every degree subject, men earn more a decade into their careers than women.

Ten years after graduation, male medical students earn a median (average) wage of £55,000 a year, while female medical students typically earn a median wage of £45,000 a year.

Students of the London School of Economics, Oxford and Cambridge earn the most.

Higher earners tend to come from wealthier backgrounds.

Higher education leads to much better earnings than non-graduate salaries.

IFS, based in London, is an economic research institute, with specialist knowledge on UK taxation and public policy. They are an independent body producing academic and policy-related studies.

How the authors arrived at their conclusions

The research used anonymised tax data and student loan records for 260,000 students up to ten years after graduation. Government departments hold this information in order to carry out large-scale studies, looking at outcomes over many years. This is the first time a ‘big data’ approach has been used to examine how graduate earnings vary by institution of study, degree subject and parental income.

The data set includes cohorts of graduates who started university in the period 1998–2011 and whose earnings (or lack of) were observed over a number of tax years. The paper largely focuses on the tax year 2012/13.

The argument about the gender gap just want go away!

The gender pay gap was particularly noticeable amongst higher earners, even if both female and male students studied the same course at the same university. Females are regularly appearing as being paid less than their male counterparts.

The report shows that male students earned more than female students in every subject, with the exception of European languages and literature, in which females earned more. On average, female graduates earn around £3,000 less each year ten years after completing their studies: male graduates earned an annual wage of £17,900, and female graduates earned £14,500. See Table 1.

Table 1: Earnings by subject ten years after graduation for females and males

Degree

Female Salary

Male Salary

Medicine

£45,400

£55,300

Economics

£38,200

£42,000

Engineering and technology

£23,200

£31,200

Law

£26,200

£30,100

Physical Sciences

£24,800

£29,800

Education

£24,400

£29,600

Architecture

£22,500

£28,600

Maths and Computer science

£22,000

£26,800

Business

£22,000

£26,500

History and philosophy

£23,200

£26,500

Social sciences

£20,500

£26,200

Biological sciences

£23,800

£25,200

European languages and literature

£26,400

£25,000

Linguistics and classics

£23,200

£24,100

Veterinary and agriculture

£18,900

£21,400

Mass communication

£18,100

£19,300

Creative arts

£14,500

£17,900

Source: IFS (based on median annual salary)

What the report said about those with degrees and those without degrees

The study also showed that graduates are much more likely to have a job and to earn more than non-graduates, who are twice as likely to have no earnings compared to graduates ten years on.

Due to low employment status, half of non-graduate women had earnings below £8,000 a year at around age 30. Only a quarter of female graduates were earning less than this. Half were earning more than £21,000 a year.

For those with significant earnings (the report defines this as above £8,000 a year), average earnings for male graduates ten years after graduation were £30,000, and, for non-graduates of the same age, average earnings were £22,000. The equivalent figures for females with significant earnings were £27,000 and £18,000 respectively.

Parental income influences how much a child can earn

Graduates from wealthy households earn significantly more after leaving university than students from poorer backgrounds, who do the same degree at the same university.

Taking into account the subject studied and university attended the average student from a higher-income background (defined as being from approximately the top 20% of households of those applying to higher education) earned around 10% more in the labour market than the average student from poorer backgrounds (the other 80% of students).

To put this into perspective, the 10% highest-earning male graduates from richer backgrounds earned about 20% more than the 10% highest earners from relatively poorer backgrounds.

The equivalent premium for the 10% highest-earning female graduates from richer backgrounds was 14%.

The university your child goes to has an influence on their potential earnings

The London School of Economics (LSE) was the most lucrative university, according to the study, followed by Cambridge and then Oxford, which also happen to be the best universities in the UK. The researchers did mention that LSE benefited from offering high-paying subjects like economics and law.

Around 10% of male graduates from LSE, Oxford and Cambridge were earning in excess of £100,000 a year ten years after graduation in 2012/13, with LSE graduates earning the most. LSE was the only institution with more than 10% of its female graduates earning in excess of £100,000 at year ten years on.

At the other end of the scale, there were some institutions (23 for men and 9 for women) where the average graduate earnings were less than those of the average non-graduate ten years on.

The subject your child chooses does have an impact on their earnings

Those who studied medicine and economics were found to earn significantly more than those reading other subjects. Those with qualifications in the fields of engineering and technologies, education, and law have gone on to make up the rest of the top five highest-paid graduates.

Medical graduates earned a median wage of around £50,000 for men and around £45,000 for women after ten years. Economics was the second most lucrative degree, with male students earning a median salary of £42,000, and women earning £38,000.

For males, it was estimated that approximately 12% of economics graduates earned above £100,000 some ten years after graduation; by contrast, 6% of those studying medicine or law earned more than £100,000.

For females, it was estimated that approximately 9% of economics graduates earned above £100,000 some ten years after graduation; by contrast, just 1% of those studying medicine and 3% of those studying law did so.

Those who obtained degrees in creative arts had the lowest salaries, with an average wage of £17,900 for men and £14,500 for women.

So what did the researchers who conducted the study have to say about their findings?

Jack Britton from IFS and the main author of the study said:

This work shows that the advantages of coming from a high-income family persist for graduates right into the labour market at age 30. While this finding doesn’t necessarily implicate either universities or firms, it is of crucial importance for policymakers trying to tackle social immobility.

Anna Vignoles of the University of Cambridge said students should think carefully about what they choose to study:

The research illustrates strongly that for most graduates, higher education leads to much better earnings than those earned by non-graduates, although students need to realise that their subject choice is important in determining how much of an earnings advantage they will have.

Neil Shephard of Harvard University said:

Earnings vary substantially with university, subject, gender and cohort. This impacts on which parts of the HE sector the UK government funds through the subsidy inherent within income-contingent student loans. The next step in the research is to quantify that variation in funding, building on today’s paper.

ND's views

For any parent, advising their children on the best subjects to do at A Level and for their degree becomes difficult. Whilst every child should be given the freedom to do what they want, care must be taken in deciding what they actually study and the prospects that await them once their degree is completed.

Are we in danger of ignoring what our children are strongest at, and what they could therefore contribute to society in the future, if we force them into choosing a subject where money and earnings are the predominant incentives? Whilst the cost of living may be increasing in many parts of the world, temptation to select a subject based on earnings will influence some, but surely the only option should be a child’s natural calling.

Does a conformist child have a better chance in life than one who finds and pursues their creative calling? There are many that will conform by basing their subject selection on future earnings. Trying to counteract this will be those that follow their natural calling, where passion and creativity lead this choice.

In many cases both sets of kids will get by in life, albeit with one earning significantly more than the other. But are we suddenly all going to force our kids to think very carefully about what they do and where they study – if they meet the requirements? After all, there is not much that can be done regarding gender or level of family wealth in the 80% of us who are not at the top end of that scale. But in the future, depending on your child’s choices, their children might very well have wealth on their side too.

The power of earnings cannot be ignored, although I believe the majority of parents will be supportive of their kid’s choices, even if they know this will mean they will not reach the higher-earner ranks. The report does not provide an insight into job satisfaction and happiness of the graduates and I suspect that this would tell a different story.